Author uau
Recipients arjennienhuis, benjamin.peterson, eric.smith, ezio.melotti, loewis, martin.panter, terry.reedy, uau, vstinner
Date 2012-06-21.21:21:04
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1340313666.64.0.563392428103.issue3982@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I've hit this limitation a couple more times, and none of the proposed workarounds are adequate. Working with protocols and file formats that use human-readable markup is significantly clumsier than it was with Python 2 (using either the % operator, which also lost its support for byte strings in Python 3, or .format()).

This bug report was closed by its original creator, after early posts where IMO nobody made as good a case for the feature as they could have. Is it possible to reopen this bug or is it necessary to file a new one?

Is there any clear argument AGAINST having .format() for bytes, other than work needed to implement it? Some posts mention "mixing characters and bytes", but I see no reason why this would be much of a real practical concern if it's a method on bytes objects producing bytes output.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-06-21 21:21:06uausetrecipients: + uau, loewis, terry.reedy, vstinner, eric.smith, benjamin.peterson, ezio.melotti, arjennienhuis, martin.panter
2012-06-21 21:21:06uausetmessageid: <1340313666.64.0.563392428103.issue3982@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2012-06-21 21:21:06uaulinkissue3982 messages
2012-06-21 21:21:04uaucreate